E X E C U T I V E F O R U M

THINK—OR SINK
LEADING IN A VUCA WORLD
by Lee G. Bolman and Terrence E. Deal

A
wise and successful executive got to the heart masters can play 25 lesser opponents simultaneously,
of the challenge managers face every day: “The beating all of them while spending only seconds on
world simply can’t be made sense of, and facts each move.
can’t be organized, unless you have a mental model to
Neuroscientists now tell us that believing is seeing
begin with.” Contemporary leaders need mental models
rather than the reverse. The human brain constructs
that are versatile and subtle enough to make sense of
its own images of reality and then projects them onto
the VUCA (volatile-uncertain-complex-ambiguous)
the external world. Reality, therefore, is what each
world of modern institutions. In such a confusing
of us believes it to be. Our mental models—rich or
world, leadership has to begin with thinking—making
impoverished—determine the breadth and depth of
sense of what’s going on. Effective leaders find options
our personal reality. How you think determines what
in messy situations through multiframe thinking and
you see and how you respond to situations.
parsimonious stories that provide focus and offer
direction. There are many labels for such mental models: maps,
paradigms, mind-sets, worldviews, and cognitive lenses,
Cognitive psychologists tell us that human thinking
to name a few. We call them frames. A frame is an
and perception don’t work the way people typically
amalgam of beliefs and assumptions that you carry in
believe. Common sense, for example, says that vision is
your head to help you understand and negotiate some
simple: you look at something and see it. Not so, says
part of your world. An accurate frame makes it easier
the research. Instead, your brain is always looking for
to (a) know what’s going on, (b) see more options,
matches between what’s out there and what’s inside.
and (c) make better choices. Frames are vital because
The brain pays attention to differences between what
muddled human affairs don’t come with computerized
it expects and what’s there. It’s an efficient process that
navigation systems to guide you turn by turn to your
can be very powerful when your mental images are
destination. Instead, you need to develop and carry
accurate but very poor when they’re not. Newborns,
accurate cognitive maps in your head.
for example, can’t tell the difference between their
mother’s face and a pumpkin because they haven’t Frames make it possible to register and assemble key
yet developed their visual software. Chess masters, in bits of available data into a coherent pattern—an image
contrast, can instantly recognize more than 50,000 of what’s going on. When it works fluidly, the process
configurations of a chessboard. That’s why grand takes the form of “rapid cognition,” which Malcolm

SPRING 2015 35

The ultimate goal is fluid
expertise.
Gladwell examines in his best-seller Blink. He describes
such swift thinking as a gift that makes it possible to
read “deeply into the narrowest slivers of experience. In
basketball, the player who can take in and comprehend
all that is happening around him or her is said to have
‘court sense.’” In the military, it’s called “situational
awareness.”
Even with the right map, getting around will be slow
and awkward if you have to stop and ponder at every
intersection. The ultimate goal is fluid expertise, the
sort of know-how that lets you think on the fly and
navigate organizations as easily as you drive home on
a familiar route. You can make decisions quickly and
automatically because you know at a glance where you
are and what you need to do next.
Frame Breaking
Framing involves matching mental images to situations.
Reframing involves shifting frames when circumstances
change. But reframing also requires another skill—the
ability to break frames. Why do that? A news story
from the summer of 2007 offers a powerful example.
Imagine yourself among a group of friends enjoying
dinner on the patio of your Washington, DC, home.
An armed, hooded intruder suddenly appears and
points a gun at the head of a 14-year-old guest. It’s
a potentially lethal home invasion. “Give me your
money,” he says, “or I’ll start shooting.”
If you’re at that table, what do you do? You could
freeze. Or you could try to creatively break frame and
put a new spin on the situation. That’s exactly what the
hostess did. She offered the new arrival a glass of wine.
He was so impressed with the Chateau Malescot that
36 LEADER TO LEADER
she offered him the bottle. He drank some more and
sampled the cheese. He put the gun away, apologized
for the disturbance, and walked off with his wine.
No one was hurt, and nothing was stolen. He left an
unbroken wine glass in an alley behind the house.
Breaking frame made the difference. In one stroke, the
hostess redefined the situation from “we might all be
killed here” to “let’s offer our guest some wine.” Like
her, artistic managers frame and reframe experience
fluidly, sometimes with extraordinary results. Frames
are both windows on a territory and a sextant or
compass for navigation. Each window offers a unique
view. Every directional device has strengths and
limitations. Only experience and practice bring the
adroitness and wisdom to take stock of a situation and
plot a course with confidence and skill.
Four Leadership Frames
What you read or hear about leadership takes many
different directions, producing conflicting schools
of thought. Each theology has its own scripture,
and you have to sort through a cacophony of voices
and visions when seeking enlightenment. Instead of
choosing one or another of the competing voices, we
have merged four distinctive ideas—structural, human
resource, political, and symbolic—into an inclusive
framework. Together, they are powerful enough to
capture the subtlety and complexity of leadership and
organizations yet simple enough to be helpful. Each
frame tells a different story about leadership, and each
offers a distinctive path for leaders.
1. Analysts and factories: the structural frame
In 2012, Forbes rated Amazon founder Jeff
Bezos as the best CEO in America: “the corporate
chief that others most want to meet, emulate and
deify.” Fifteen years earlier, when his fledgling
company was barely a year old, Bezos’ letter to
shareholders laid out his leadership story in three
elegantly simple themes: First, Amazon would
focus relentlessly on its customers—the company
uses hundreds of metrics, most related to customer
service, to track its performance. Theme two:
Amazon would make decisions based on long-term
 leadership rather than short-term profitability.
Bezos repeatedly ignores complaints from Wall
Street that he’s cheating his shareholders by shaving
his margins too thin and plowing too much money
back into the business. Theme three: Amazon would
thrive on data-based learning, killing initiatives that
weren’t panning out and doubling down on those
that did. Bezos’s formula for success is deceptively
simple. Anything that isn’t about customers, long
term, or data based isn’t important. He’s kept his
word.
Like any great leader, Bezos relies on more than
one perspective, but is particularly at home in the
structural frame. This view emphasizes rationality
and structure, including policies, goals, technology,
specialized roles, tight coordination, data-driven
decisions, and formal relationships.
3. Warriors and jungles: the political frame
2. Catalysts and families: the human resource frame
One thing that distinguishes CEO Terri Kelly
from most of her 10,000 associates at W. L. Gore
is that she has a title. Most of her colleagues are
simply “associates.” Like other leaders at Gore,
Kelly was elected to her job by her peers, because
Gore believes that you’re a leader only if people
want to follow you. Gore’s lifeblood is innovative
products, and to get there it has shaped itself as
“a team-based, flat lattice organization that fosters
personal initiative.” Teams form and leaders emerge
around opportunities. Creativity flourishes in small,
mutually accountable teams where individuals
can be themselves and maximize their potential.
Traditional managers would see it as a perfect recipe
for chaos and failure, but Gore has sales of more
than $3 billion annually and has never had a losing
year since it was founded in 1958 by W. L. (Bill)
Gore.
Terri Kelly credits Bill Gore as the architect of
Gore’s management approach, but she’s continued
the tradition as a true believer and an evangelist.
At the heart of the approach, as she describes it,
is a belief that individuals do best when they, not
bosses, decide what they want to work on and where
they can make the greatest contribution. But the
coin has a flip side—once you make a commitment,
you’re expected to deliver, and your teammates will
hold you accountable. At Gore, that philosophy
allows both “rainmakers” and “implementers” to
flourish. Rainmakers come up with wild ideas,
and implementers make them real. The two types
drive each other crazy, but both are essential. Part
of Kelly’s job is to create a climate in which both
can prosper.
W. L. Gore is one of many companies whose
leadership is strongly committed to basic tenets of
the human resource frame. Other examples include
Costco, Google, Men’s Wearhouse, and SAS. All
are committed to a philosophy that’s easy to espouse
but tough to practice: if you hire good people and
support and engage them, good things will happen.
Artist, entrepreneur, futuristic visionary, and
brilliant marketer—Apple’s Steve Jobs was all of
these. He was also an aggressive pugilist ready to
slug it out for any project or cause he championed.
His combative style relied more on persistence
and brute force than compromise and subtlety. A
case in point was his battle with Michael Eisner,
Walt Disney Studios CEO, over kids’ movies. The
skirmish traced back to 1986, when Jobs bought 70
percent of Lucasfilm’s computer division because
he thought its technology was “really cool.” Over
the next several years, Jobs poured more than
$50 million into the business, even as it kept
losing money. As things started to turn around,
he persuaded a player with deep pockets—Walt
Disney Studios—to finance the studio’s first feature
film, Toy Story.
The Disney deal saved the business—now called
Pixar—but led to running battles between Jobs and
Disney CEO Michael Eisner over how to split the
profits.The feud got worse after Eisner publicly
criticized “computer companies” for promoting
digital piracy. Eisner didn’t name names, but
everyone knew he was talking about Apple and
iTunes. Whether he wanted a war or not, Eisner
had inflamed a dangerous adversary. He and Jobs
SPRING 2015 37
 traded salvos as the Disney–Pixar deal was coming
up for renewal.
Jobs, as a shrewd warrior, began to assemble his
allies. He cultivated relationships with key members
Steve Jobs was magician as
of Disney’s board and spread the word that there
would be no new deal as long as Eisner was CEO.
Eisner countered with a memo to the board insisting
much as warrior.
that Disney was in the driver’s seat because it owned
all of Pixar’s characters—and, furthermore, Pixar’s
next film wasn’t expected to be very good. The
announcements into compelling, captivating
memo leaked, and Jobs was predictably infuriated.
theater. But not all magicians are warriors. Howard
Even worse, Eisner had seriously underestimated
Schultz, who built Starbucks from a tiny retailer in
Pixar’s next film, Finding Nemo, which won the
Seattle to thousands of outlets around the globe,
Oscar for animated films and became one of
will fight if he has to but is happier talking about
Disney’s most successful movies.
love, soul, and spirit. The essence of his leadership
Two proud and stubborn warriors dug in for a story is simple: coffee and community. He believes
battle that many observers viewed as more about in offering great products in a warm and welcoming
ego than substance. Eisner threatened to make Toy environment that functions as a “third place”
Story 3 with no help from Pixar. Jobs countered between home and work. In his mind, you build a
that he was cutting off negotiations with Disney powerful and enduring brand spiritually “with love,
and added that Disney produced nothing but flops one cup at a time,” not with a formal ad campaign.
in recent years. The impasse broke only when the
He retired as Starbucks’ chief executive in 2000 but
Disney board decided they needed Pixar more than
returned in 2008 when the business was beginning
they needed Eisner. They fired their CEO and
to slump. In his visits to stores, he saw nothing very
replaced him with his deft, good-humored second-
tangible or specific wrong but felt that the magic and
in-command, Bob Iger. Iger quickly phoned Steve
soul were dissipating. On his return, Schultz closed
Jobs. After extended negotiations, Disney agreed to
all the stores for an afternoon of barista reeducation,
buy Pixar for $7.1 billion in stock. Jobs became a
and engaged the executive team in a discussion of
billionaire, a board member, and Disney’s biggest
what they could learn from the Beatles as an example
shareholder.
of an iconic brand that reinvented itself several times
Jobs, Microsoft’s Bill Gates, and Oracle’s Larry but finally fell apart. The magic was rekindled.
Ellison are among the many legendary entrepreneurs Starbucks weathered the economic downturn of
who relish combat and are accomplished politicians. 2008 and came back stronger than ever.
The political frame sees a world of scarce resources
and competing interests in which conflict is a Schultz joins legends like Thomas Watson of IBM,
central process and power is the critical resource. Bill George of Medtronic, and Herb Kelleher of
Ellison, who was one of Jobs’s best friends, put it Southwest Airlines, all magicians at home with
bluntly, “I’m addicted to winning. The more you symbolic ideas and assumptions. The symbolic
win, the more you want to win.” frame sees a world of ambiguity and uncertainty
in which individuals and institutions continually
4. Magicians and temples: the symbolic frame seek to make sense and create meaning. Logic and
Steve Jobs was magician as much as warrior. data matter less than faith and values, which are
The public knew him as a charismatic salesman expressed through stories, heroes, ceremonies,
whose flair for drama could transform product humor, play, and drama.

38 LEADER TO LEADER
 Frame
Structural Human Resource Political Symbolic
Metaphor for Factory Family Jungle Temple, theater
­o rganization
Central concepts Rules, roles, goals, Needs, emotions, skills, Power, conflict, Culture, meaning,
­p olicies, technology, relationships ­c ompetition, ­o rganizational ­m etaphor, ritual, ceremony,
­e nvironment politics stories, heroes
Image of leadership Social architecture Empowerment Advocacy and political Inspiration, Significance
savvy
Basic leadership Attune structure to task, Align organization with Develop agenda and power Create faith, hope,
­c hallenge technology, environment human needs and talent base ­m eaning, and belief

TABLE 1. TH E F OU R - F R AM E M OD E L

Multiframe Thinking should be happening. Each version contains a glimmer of

Table 1 provides an overview of the four-frame model.
It shows that each frame has its own image of reality.
You may be drawn to some and puzzled or repelled by
others. Our research has consistently shown that the
ability to use multiple frames is associated with greater
effectiveness for managers and leaders. Successful
leaders reframe, consciously or intuitively, until they
understand the situation at hand. They use multiple
perspectives to develop a diagnosis of what’s really
going on. Then they integrate their understanding
into their leadership story, the script they use to guide
themselves and their constituents.
Multiframe thinking requires moving beyond narrow,
mechanical approaches for understanding the world.
We cannot count the number of times managers have
told us that they handled some problem the “only
way” possible. Such statements betray a failure of both
imagination and courage and reveal a paralyzing fear
of uncertainty. It may be comforting to think that
failure was unavoidable and that you did all you could.
But it can be liberating to realize there is always more
than one way to respond to any problem or dilemma.
Those who master reframing report a liberating sense
of choice, freedom, and power.
Akira Kurosawa’s classic film Rashomon recounts the same
event through the eyes of several witnesses. Each tells a
different story. Similarly, every organization is filled with
people who have their own interpretations of what is and
truth, but each is a product of the prejudices and blind
spots of its maker. Great leaders rely on multiple lenses,
possess the skill to use each, enjoy the wisdom to match
frames to situations, and have created a leadership story
that assembles what they see into a powerful and coherent
script that is right for the times and circumstances.
Conclusion
How leaders think determines what they see, how they
act, and what results they achieve. Each of four lenses—
structural, human resource, political, and symbolic—
opens a new set of possibilities for leaders to use in
finding their bearings and choosing a course. Narrow
thinking all too often leads to a failure of imagination,
a major cause of the shortfall between the reach and the
grasp of so many leaders—the empty chasm between
noble aspirations and disappointing results. Great
leaders use multiple frames to see what they need to
see and to craft a story about what will work.
Great leaders rely on
multiple lenses.

SPRING 2015 39
Organizations, over time, have spawned their
own narratives. The interplay of leaders’ and
organizations’ stories gives rise to an emerging
script that, at its best, provides a compelling image
of where a group or organization is, where it needs
to go, and how it will get there. The story serves as a
Lee G. Bolman holds the Marion Block Missouri
Chair in Leadership at the Bloch School of
Management, University of Missouri–Kansas
City. He received his PhD from Yale University
and has taught at Harvard and Carnegie-Mellon
Universities. Bolman is a speaker and consultant
who has worked with organizations in the United
States, Asia, Europe, and Latin America. He
lives in Brookline, Massachusetts, with his wife,
Joan Gallos, and a spirited Theory Y Cockapoo,
Douglas McGregor.
40 LEADER TO LEADER
drama in which both leader and constituents become
actors. Great leaders test and evolve their story over
time, experimenting, polishing, abandoning plot
lines that don’t work, and reinforcing those that
do. Bad stories lead to disaster. Good ones conjure
magic.
Terrence E. Deal has served on the faculties
of Stanford, Harvard, Vanderbilt, and the
University of Southern California. He received his
PhD from Stanford. He is the author of the best
seller Corporate Cultures (with A. A. Kennedy,
1982). He is a consultant to business, health care,
military, educational, and religious organizations
domestically and in Europe, Scandinavia,
the Middle East, Canada, South America,
Japan, and Southeast Asia. He is the founder
of the University of La Verne’s Deal Leadership
Institute. He lives and makes wine in San Luis
Obispo, California, with his wife Sandy. Bolman
and Deal have written many books together,
including Reframing Organizations: Artistry,
Choice and Leadership, and Leading with Soul:
An Uncommon Journey of Spirit. Their most
recent book, How Great Leaders Think: The Art
of Reframing, was published in 2014.